The Speaker of the House this evening ruled that it is the Public Accounts Committee itself that has to decide whether or not the contents of the Henley & Partners contract with the government of Malta should be subjected to its scrutiny.

The ruling was given in parliament this evening after the opposition formally requested the Speaker of the House of Representatives to “take note of the lie in which Justice Minister Owen Bonnici was caught in during the meeting of the Public Accounts Committee last week”. Dr Bonnici had told parliament that the subject matter could not be divulged because it was subject to a civil law suit filed by a rival bidder for Malta’s citizenship scheme.

Dr Bonnici had told parliament that the government “had to bow its head” to the court’s ruling. The opposition, through a letter to PAC chairman Tonio Fenech, had said that it was unacceptable that a matter of national security and national importance not be subjected to scrutiny by parliament because the case was stuck in court and because the government felt the information was commercially sensitive. The opposition also said that that the contract had never been presented in court and that no court had ruled that the contract is not made public. The letter was sent to the PAC chairman by opposition MP Jason Azzopardi.

In his ruling, speaker Anglu Farrugia said that there was no doubt that parliament was the highest institution of the land and that matters such as these should be scrutinised. However, he said that according to parliamentary rules and procedure, the chair could not order the government to put the information for the PAC to be scrutinised. He said that the only instance that this could be done was if the chair had a copy of the document in question. The same, he said, held true for the PAC chairman – he could not demand the information if he did not have a copy of the document. The request for the contract to be made available was made by Tonio Fenech as Chairman of the committee.

The call, said the speaker, had to be made by the whole PAC. In a somewhat abstract explanation, the speaker said that it was up to the PAC as a body to demand the contract’s details, and that the onus would then be on the government to provide it. Put simply, it means that the PAC would have to take a vote on whether or not the contract details be issued. But given that there are four government members on the board and only three opposition members, this is unlikely to happen.

Breach of privilege complaint

After the Speaker read his ruling, Mr Fenech raised a breach of privilege complaint against Justice Minister Owen Bonnici, saying he had deliberately misled the committee by claiming that a court had issued a decree banning publication of the Henley contract.

PN reaction

In a statement following the ruling, the PN said it is clear that the speaker's ruling shows that the PAC has the right to request the contract for scrutiny.

It said it expected the government to stop beating about the bush and hand over the said information.

PM replies

In reply, the Prime Minister said that for a number of times he committed himself to allow the IIP programme to be scrutinised.

The Speaker’s ruling confirms that it must be the PAC as a whole, not just one member, who can ask for the publication of the contract.

The government will be publishing the contract when the time comes for discussion and the PAC asks for it, with all the commercial reservations in place.

PN calls on Speaker to take not of Minister Bonnici's lie